ROMs released to the public?

[Atarinvader]

What, if any, 2600 ROMs have been released copywrite free? i.e. that can be distributed, legaly, via the internet.

[cx2k]

quote:

---

Originally posted by atarinvader:

What, if any, 2600 ROMs have been released copywrite free? i.e. that can be distributed, legaly, via the internet.

---

 

That's a question that can be debated greatly and it's not known if anyone can ever say 100% that a ROM can be distributed legally.

 

A couple of years ago, we at CGE got the Garfield rom and contacted Jim Davis, the author of the Garfield comic strip. He gave permission for the rom to be passed around, but who's to say that Atari, in it's current state, didn't have some claim to the game.

 

I imagine a similar situation occured with Lord of the Rings. Although permission may have been gotten from the programmer, would Hasbro (who currently owns Parker Bros.) have any claim to that game?

 

I don't think you can ever be 100% sure with any of these long lost games.

 

John

[King Atari]

Some of the pirate carts from the obscure Brazilian companies?

[Thomas Jentzsch]

Most of the modern homebrews can be legally distributed on the web. But the copyright is still with the programmer.

[Snider-man]

And if you post any ROMs from a modern programmer, you REALLY should get their permission. It'd be harder with the older ROMs, but the modern programmers are here everyday and you owe them that courtesy.

[Scott Stilphen]

Pretty much a mute point now, since nearly every ROM is easy to find on the net.

[jhd]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CX2K:

I imagine a similar situation occured with Lord of the Rings. Although permission may have been gotten from the programmer, would Hasbro (who currently owns Parker Bros.) have any claim to that game?

---

 

If the programmer was paid for his/her work, then all the rights are owned by his/her employer (unless he explicitly contracted to retain the rights). It's the same with any job, it's called the work product doctrine.

 

I think it is just proper etiquette to ask the programmer's permission, anyway.

 

There is also the issue with licensed properties (e.g. the Disney games). Look at the Blue Sky Rangers site: they were able to release/reissue *most* of the Intellivision games, except those that were originally licensed from a third-party. Kudos to whomever contacted Jim Davies before releasing the Garfield game.

 

In practice, nobody is going to get sued over this issue. I doubt that many of these firms even know what they hold the rights too anymore.

 

Over in the Tandy world, someone once tried to get a copyright release on old (pre-1985) software from Samsung (who was then the owner to the rights). They refused as they did not believe they even owned the rights. This same belief would also preclude them from suing someone for infringement.

 

I'll save the discussion of equitable estoppel and reasonable reliance for another day...

 

[ 04-09-2002: Message edited by: Jonathan H. Davidson ]